Rediscovering the true value of life (published in The Daily Pioneer)

The best things in life, they say, come free. It is a dubious statement that we may not readily agree to in a world where anything material has a price tag attached to it. The problem is not in the maxim that I opened this piece with; the problem is with our definition of “the best things”. We have devised a curious way to assess our lives by putting a numerical value on everything we can possess and call our own. Even as we scamper all over the place trying to fetch luxuries and comfort items, we tend to forget several things which we don’t personally possess but are indispensable to our existence.

They are more valuable to us than all the material assets of the world put together. Air, sunlight, water, and soil for instance. Many things are too obvious for us to appreciate as I discovered recently when astronauts Sunita Williams and Barry Wilmore got stranded in space. Reports say that her extended stay would affect her body adversely and as per NASA, it could alter the structure of the eyes and brain, and their function “because low-gravity conditions shift the body's fluids toward the head”. Gravity: The natural phenomenon that Newton discovered by chance in late 1966 when he saw an apple fall to the ground isn’t something that we pay attention to in our daily lives. We take universal gravitation for granted, just as we take many other conventional things and natural forces as part of our privilege on this planet. The heat wave sweeping across the globe, the unprecedented floods and unseasonal snow are all testimonies of this casual attitude we have adopted towards the most valuable things in life that the universe has granted us. Climate change has been converted to a mere topic of discussion and not as a veritable threat for all species. Who will tell us that we have been presently allowed to live the best versions of ourselves aided by natural resources and no matter how hard we try, we cannot replicate these conditions in another part of the universe anytime soon? We may be vain to declare that space travel will soon become a regular thing thanks to man’s daring explorations.

We can claim that we are doing everything we can to shift our domicile to another planet. But let us make no mistake – we cannot find another optimal domain to establish ourselves should the present one perish because of our over-indulgences. Our conceit might make us proclaim that the skies are for us to invade, but to find another place like this where everything is measured just right for our survival will only remain a pipedream.

It’s time we stopped taking the vital elements of existence as a given. It’s time for us to stop expanding our wingspans without regard for nature. That an apple should fall is part of a grand cosmic design, but the fact that hills are sliding, forests are burning and villages are getting swept away is part of man’s narrow and reckless nature. The value of the many simple blessings we have been bestowed with will be known only when these free privileges are taken away from us.

Is capability connected to age? (Column in The Daily Pioneer)

In May 2020, close on the heels of the covid outbreak, my husband lost his job. It was an unexpected knock to take barely a month after he was awarded the best employee. The company that he was serving for the past many years attributed the pink slip to the pandemic, and following it, it was near impossible for him to find another job. In most cases, it seemed as if he was deemed over-age. In the traditional sense, it must be true that 58 years is the time to hang one’s boots, but taking superannuation was far from his mind.

His mental and physical abilities had not dimmed a wee bit and he had many more years of active work life left in him. But it was hard to convince a work culture that was transitioning to a younger demographic about his worthiness. He was soon forced to stop looking for a job and start something of his own. Three years on, it is a decision we don’t regret taking. But there is one thing that I have not been able to decipher.

If a company considers a person to be too old to seek employment at that age, what makes older doyens eligible to seek fresh terms as heads of state? This question is more relevant now after John Biden was forced to step aside following doubts over his diminishing cognitive abilities on various platforms. Biden’s dropping out in no way suggests that his opponent (who is younger by only three years) is more eligible to be the boss at the White House if age is a major criterion for holding responsible positions.

Yet, in public service, it is par for the course for older men and women to push it till economic and social policies allow or they are naturally indisposed. Why is 80 a wholesome number to be at the helm of a state and 60 an age to retire for employees? There is no doubt that the age gap between the highest and lowest denominators at a workplace has widened significantly.

There are concerns about an agile, IT-driven young generation unable to work alongside an older brigade that follows old clunky ways. On this side things, it is still a huge challenge for those used to archaic practices of functioning to adopt digital modes overnight. But experience is something we still cannot discount. On the other hand, we also need a lot of young blood to keep our workplaces vibrant. People age differently.  Their biological age may not be commensurate with their chronological age. In a recent interview on CNN, Anthony Fauci, former chief medical advisor to the President of the United States looked and sounded many times more agile and vigorous at 81 than Biden does. My mother at 77 is much less healthy than a few other relations in their 90s. So to determine people’s capabilities based on the number of summers they have seen is a faulty method.  Our cognitive age and ability to handle the pressures of a job is something only we can gauge.

It is for us to decide if we are fit to handle the responsibilities – be it to serve the nation, run a company or a household. John Biden must have eventually realised that cracks are showing up in his public image and faculties and that stepping aside is the most gracious thing to do, both for his self-esteem and for the sake of his country. Although it had to come after much persuasion, he made the call. Congratulations to him for being rational and accepting ‘it is what it is’.

Let us stop glorifying multi-tasking

A hand on the wheel, a thumb on the QUERTY keys in the phone, and eyes alternating between the road and the speeding text.

Feeding a toddler on the lap, a phone sandwiched between the right cheek and ear, a skewed pair of eyes scanning the laptop screen.

Half an ear on the speaker on stage, a revisionary glance on the points to present and mind on the agenda for a client meeting the next day.

Math formulae clouding the eyes, song lyrics on You Tube filling the brain and messages from a school group yanking attention.

These are examples of a few multi-taskers, capable of hopping between assignments and connecting dissimilar mental nodes at the same time without a hassle. They juggle jobs in hand with aplomb and carry the tag of super achievers with elan. There is one problem, though, and a serious one at that.

Unbeknownst to them, the two sides of their brain’s prefrontal cortex have slipped into a pattern of disharmony, and their think tank has become muddled. What they consider a phenomenal coup of their mental power has in truth turned detrimental to their brain capacity. What they take pride in—being able to get more done in less time —has in reality become their nemesis.

Multi-taskers are often lauded, but the truth is this much-acclaimed skill has no merit except it injects a notion in them of being a notch better than others, hence more worthy of accolades. It is a myth probably instituted by new age corporates that expect their employees to extract their last dreg of energy to perform, failing which, to be ready to perish.

The downsides of multi-tasking has been in discussion for a long time now, but they have been ignored deliberately for reasons of vanity than purpose. It serves one’s reputation to be a multi-tasker in a world of equal calibers; it gives fillip to one’s self-confidence to imagine that to be able to do multiple tasks at one time reflects one’s competence, and it acts as a pick-me-up sign in a contest where speed is key. Add to these, a delusion of time-management it induces into our psyche.

None of the above is true. What is true is that multi-tasking, especially when it involves neurologically intense tasks that require cognitive effort, retards our reflexes, mixes our priorities and takes our eyes off what is important. Research says it adds burden to the brain, consumes more glucose, thereby sapping our energy and making us disoriented. Our error index goes up and the quality of work suffers. As simplistic as it might sound in words, the truth behind this ‘talent’ to juggle is a lot more damaging than we may care to think. The negative effects often remain unperceived, but they come out in the open in the long term when tasks are ridden with mistakes and the final outcome is below par.

The brain science behind it apart, arguments against multi-tasking have sound reasoning. Switching focus frequently and trying to fix attention on more than one thing demands the brain to turn off from one thing and move to the other, which takes extra time. It may not seem like much, but when gathered over a series of actions, the shifting can result in longer processing time and delays. It is like how leaving our appliances on standby can lead to higher current bills that we fail to notice.

Having said that, it is nearly impossible for people to dislodge the habit of multi-tasking when workload gets overwhelming. Students have more than a handful to accomplish in order to make the cut, employees with ballooning targets stare at back-to-back deadlines and managers have bottom lines to bolster. Given these, multi-tasking seems like the only way to manoeuver through increasing work pressure.

It is a tough call to make, but one must find a middle path where neither productivity suffers nor one’s well-being. Organising chaos will require discipline and an ability to prioritise one’s responsibilities. The first thing to do is to dethrone multi-tasking as a champion’s asset and decide that we will not put our brain in duress unless life is at stake. We have a choice to either clutter our mind with miscellany or to fix our focus on one and give each task its own deserved time, and get it done well.

At the end of the day, we have only two hands and let us give them only enough to handle. Juggling might be an exciting sport, but only those who are exceptionally adept will ace it. A majority of us have butter fingers and cannot dabble with more than one thing at a time, and we had better know it before dropping things becomes an incorrigible habit.